Slashdot Log In
The 10 Worst PC Keyboards of All Time
Journal written by kabz (770151) and posted by
CmdrTaco
on Thu Jan 10, 2008 08:23 AM
from the click-click-click-boom dept.
from the click-click-click-boom dept.
Kabz found the 10 Worst PC Keyboards of all time which leads off with the Commodore 64 and takes a trip through PCjr country. Might trigger some nostalgia, or some sort of flashback wrist strain.
Related Stories
This discussion has been archived.
No new comments can be posted.
The Fine Print: The following comments are owned by whoever posted them. We are not responsible for them in any way.
Full
Abbreviated
Hidden
Loading... please wait.
Well... (Score:5, Informative)
I don't know about the Commadore, but I loved the Commodore 64 despite its own keyboard; though on that computer the keyboard took quite the back-seat, in terms of irritation, to the tape deck...
Though he may be on to something, since, as I sit here typing this, I'm consciously flexing my wrists ever few seconds...
Re:Well... (Score:4, Interesting)
Believe me, having owned the Atari 400 (my first computer), at that time; I would've given my right arm for a keyboard that good!
Also, at what point does price enter into this? C=64 was around $199 at the time the PC came out at, oh 7 or 8 times the price...
Parent
Re:Well... (Score:5, Funny)
Parent
C64 was a testament to good marketing (Score:4, Informative)
I dunno, given that the real competitors to the C=64 was the Atari 400 and the T.I. 99/4, I think it wasn't so bad.
The Atari 400 and the TI 99/4 were released almost 3 years before (1979) the C64 (1982). They were the VIC-20's competition, not the C64's competition.
Atari's competition to the C64 was intended to be the 1200XL (similar capability and also released in 1982). It's too bad you never owned one of those, because it's keyboard was VASTLY superior to the C64's. Also, the 1050 disk and the 1010 tape drives were both better then the commodore equivalents and it had better graphics than the C64.
Sadly, the 1200XL had compatibility problems with the 400 and 800, and Atari couldn't make money with the price pressure put upon it by the C64, so the 800XL was brought out that ironed out some bugs integrated BASIC into built-in ROM, etc, but in its cost cutting effort the keyboard was of lower quality (yet still better than the C64).
Also, at what point does price enter into this? C=64 was around $199 at the time the PC came out at, oh 7 or 8 times the price...
The IBM PC came out a few months BEFORE the C64 you know, and the C64 didn't start out at such a low price, it just got there quite quickly.
Also, to make the C64 usable you had to add a tape or floppy, and most likely a printer. The floppy cost more than the C64 itself for a time when supply was much smaller than demand. Also, the C64 and the 800XL were quite closely priced, and the 800XL was faster and had better graphics and a better keyboard even though it was a "cheapened 1200XL" design.
I also owned a Coleco ADAM which was sold as a package with built in tape drive and printer included. in 1984 it was about $100 cheaper than a comparable C64 system. The Coleco TAPE drive literally loaded faster than the C54 FLOPPY drive, and a Coleco tape held 75% more data than a C64 floppy. The Coleco CPU ran at 4 times the clock speed of the C64 and could do raw computations ad a bit more than twice the speed of the C64, and it had dedicated video RAM so nearly all the 64K of main ram could be available for applications. Above all, the ADAM keyboard was of very high quality--it had about 75 keys and 4 properly-arranged actual arrow keys (not 2 arrow keys side-by-side that needed the shift key to move up and down). Made it really good for typing out papers.
Looking back, the C64 was really a lesson in marketing--there was technically superior competition out there on all fronts except sound--it had a bad keyboard, bad BASIC with barely more than 50% of ram usable, very slow floppy, middle-of-the-road graphics and was a bit flimsy. It was, however, very well marketed, priced very aggressively and had the best software library out there (pretty much all the hit games of the Atari and better application software in addition). All that momentum led to third-party enhancements to overcome many C64 weaknesses. Still had a bad keyboard for years though.
Parent
Re: (Score:3, Informative)
I worked at a store that sold Ataris after I got my C64. We never got a 1200.
Both good machine
Re:Ah, good old Commodore vs Atari debates (Score:4, Funny)
Fortunately we've moved on and no longer have useless brand loyalty arguments... oh wait.
Parent
Re:Well... (Score:4, Interesting)
Parent
Re:Well... (Score:5, Funny)
Now come on...that isn't really how you got the nickname.
Be honest.
Parent
Re: (Score:3)
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
Never had a problem with the VIC-20 keyboard, which was the same as the C64 one. It was well spaced, comfortable to type on, and the keys were generally in the right positions. The two inch height may have annoyed some people, but over-all it was a good design. I thought the article was bizarre for that.
I'm glad they pilloried the habit of many 1980s home computer manufacturers of integrating a dangerous key with all the others. One of the bizarrest examples I can think of is the BBC Micro's. This had a
Re:Well... (Score:5, Insightful)
Insert - I've never had a use for "write over mode." Has anyone?
Windows - Almost useless, squeezed between useful keys. Fortunately my Linux systems ignore this key.
Menu - I'll just right-click, thanks.
Num lock - Why won't this go away? Why do I need a way for my numeric keypad stop to working? Are the arrow keys hard to find?
-Jon
Parent
Re:Well... (Score:5, Insightful)
You can bind it to something useful like META.
Menu - I'll just right-click, thanks.
And take your hands off the keyboard?
Num lock - Why won't this go away? Why do I need a way for my numeric keypad stop to working? Are the arrow keys hard to find?
How do you move diagonally with the arrow keys?
Parent
Re:Well... (Score:4, Informative)
I'm confused by this statement. First, there's the obvious answer: press two arrows at once.
Secondly, you can't move diagonally with the numeric keypad with numlock off. 7 is Home, 1 is End, 9 is Page Up, and 3 is Page Down. So pressing diagonally will either take you to the start/end, or up/down a page. It won't move diagonally.
In one of the responses you mentioned video games, but the only game I can think of that actually uses movement like that is Civ 4, and it supports using the number keys on the numeric keypad regardless of Numlock's state. I would hope that most games that support the numpad will work in both states.
I've never felt the need to pop off numlock (I've never accidentally hit it) but it still is fairly useless - why would I ever want to turn the numpad into a duplicate of the keys to its immediate left? (I'm aware of its historical use, on keyboards without the navigation keys. But on modern keyboards it's pretty useless.)
Parent
Re:Well... (Score:5, Informative)
To accomodate all those functions, several keys have three, some up to five(!) functions (example: Normal: ü, Shift: é, CL: Ü, CL+Shift: É, Ctrl+Alt: [). There's also discrete umlaut and accent keys (e.g. Ctrl + Alt + , then Shift + E for É).
Long story short: Some languages require more characters than US-ASCII and some layouts have been built to provide those with CapsLock as a modifier.
Parent
Re:Well... (Score:4, Funny)
Mind you I believe most people when flaming hold down shift as opposed to using caps lock.
Might be a intelligence thing....
Parent
The C=64 was not a computer (Score:4, Funny)
The Commodore 64 was an awesome gaming platform with tons of buttons.
Parent
C64!?!? How about the Atari 400? (Score:3, Informative)
All I can remember of the Atati 400 was having not having a natural feel while typing on it. It seemed I spent more time holding a single key down until the keyboard registered that I was pressing the key.
It was the Atari 400's keyboard that kept me away from that thing.
Re: (Score:3, Interesting)
Apparently... (Score:4, Insightful)
Re: (Score:3, Informative)
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
Apparently PC manufacturers have figured out the keyboard, given that the newest keyboard on this list is the #1 ranked IBM PCjr debuting in 1984.
What I find odd is that Apple's newest keyboard is just a modern rehash of the IBM PCjr chicklet design, and yet nobody I've talked to has made big complaints about it. Honestly, the thing is worse than a rollup USB pocket keyboard, worse than those little laser-on-the-table keyboards, worse than typing through one of those plastic grease-shield membranes on a cash register, and yet, because it's done by Apple, it's gotten a free ticket to reinvent the chicklet without an uproar.
Re:Apparently... (Score:4, Informative)
Parent
Re:Apparently... (Score:4, Informative)
Parent
Re: (Score:3, Interesting)
Given the newest keyboard [apple.com] from Apple shipping with the iMAC line. It looks sexy but it royally sucks to type on.
I also anyone to dare find someone that even mildly likes their laptop's keyboard.
That said, the WORST keyboard ever was on my ATARI 400 computer. Holy crap who in their right mind ever though a membrane keyboard was usable? the atari 800 at least was decent to type on....
Is it bad?? (Score:5, Funny)
Re: (Score:3, Funny)
Unless of course you enjoy using Windows.
Power Key next to Enter Key (Score:5, Interesting)
It's big feature was that it had an extra three keys for Power, Sleep, and Wake. The problem is that these were right above the inverted-T, with Power being right next to Enter.
Re:Power Key next to Enter Key (Score:4, Interesting)
But I think Microsoft is the winner here: their Wireless keyboard makes F-keys do stuff like forwarding mail and Undo/Redo. There's an F-lock mode that makes them do the right thing, acting like regular F1-F12 keys, which are used in every advanced application or game. But at the same time the Print Screen key starts switches to send the Insert keystroke. So to make a screenshot, you have to
1) Press F-Lock
2) Press Print Screen or Shift+PrintScreen
3) Press F-lock again
And these keys are placed "ergonomically" (read: you have to find them every time before using).
Parent
How about the best (Score:3, Insightful)
like a jack hammer while typing on them...
Best keyboard ever made!
Re:How about the best (Score:5, Funny)
I also like the fact that I can bludgeon someone to death with it, if worse comes to worst.
Parent
Re:How about the best (Score:4, Informative)
Parent
Can also be used as a weapon. (Score:5, Insightful)
Amen brother. I can't use any other keyboard. When you've hit a key on a model M, baby you KNOW you've hit a key. There's just neevr any question. It takes up too much space on a desk? Oh. 1) Tough 2) So? 3) get a bigger desk ya pansy.
Plus they're $2 in thrift shops. Hell, sometimes if I'm in some funky computer store and see one tucked away and ask they'll often as not say "it's too old to be useful just take it". Yeah baby, score.
Plus you can take them apart eight ways from sunday and they're nearly impossible to kill. And how many other 25 year old computer products are still usefull today?
Come to think of it my car and microwave are also 25 years old and better than any of the crap found new today.
Huh, they really were the good old days.
I do take the caps lock key off though. It's annoying to HIT IT INSTEAD OF TAB.
Parent
Full text of article (Score:4, Informative)
The Commodore 64 sits on a mile-high pedestal in the adolescent memories of millions of people, but its keyboard design--shared by Commodore's earlier VIC-20--was incredibly clumsy. One glance at it reveals three major flaws. It was visually confusing, with too many symbols printed on each key. The computer's anti-ergonomic 2-inch height made it extremely hard on the wrists of untrained typists. And the keyboard's layout leaves much to be desired, with numerous examples of poor key placement. For example, the Home/Clear key sat directly to the left of Delete (Backspace), resulting in users' making repeated accidental hits and sending the cursor back up to the top of the screen. In addition, the layout was peppered with an unusually large number of nonstandard keys such as Run/Stop and Restore. Luckily, most C64 owners remained oblivious to these problems: More often than not, they used the C64 for playing games with joysticks, saving the heavy computing work for dad's IBM PC.
9. Timex Sinclair 2068 (1983) [pcworld.com]
In the process of "improving" the wildly successful Sinclair ZX Spectrum for the United States market, Timex ruined the line with a bastardized version known as the Timex Sinclair 2068. But the 2068 shared one significant feature with its progenitor that it should have left behind: an atrocious keyboard. It's no exaggeration to say that using the 2068's keyboard without training was like trying to type while drunk and blindfolded. Some of the keys controlled as many as six different functions. Just to rub it all in, the unit had no Backspace key, a fault of many other early home computers. Did the designers assume that typists would never make mistakes? I bet the masterminds behind the 2068's keyboard backspaced over this part of their design history long ago.
8. Commodore PET 2001-32-N (1978) [pcworld.com]
Critics hailed the revised, full-stroke keyboard of the updated Commodore PET (model 2001-32-N) as a huge improvement over Commodore's first PET keyboard. But Commodore still got a few layout points terribly wrong. For one thing, the design repeated the old "Run/Stop key placed directly to the left of the Return key" trick. For another, it went with the ever-popular "lack of Backspace" maneuver; to perform something resembling a Backspace, you had to hold Shift and the left/right cursor key above the numeric keypad. And since the creators of this keyboard included a numeric keypad in the design, they cleverly omitted numbers from the primary keyboard area altogether--if you pressed keys that would conjure up numbers on any other remotely semistandard QWERTY keyboard, you'd get symbols instead. And hey, has anyone seen the period key? Oh, it's over there on the numeric keypad.
7. Texas Instruments TI-99/4 (1979) [pcworld.com]
With the release of the TI-99/4 in 1979, integrated-circuit pioneer TI took its first shaky steps into the home computer market with a $1150 package that included a special monitor and a calculator-like Chiclet keyboard. Like the original Apple II, the 99/4 did not support lowercase letters. Because of this limitation, the Shift key served as a function modifier, with the functions typically marked on a plastic overlay. The most frustrating of these key combinations was Shift-Q, which would quit a program or reset the computer, much to the chagrin of users who lost a day's work while erroneously trying to capitalize the letter Q. The 99/4's layout problems extended beyond the Q conundrum: The Enter key sat where a Right Shift key would normally reside on a standard layout. Also, the keyboard had a space key instead of a spacebar, and it was located in an odd position. The design had no dedicated Backspace key,
Backspace (Score:5, Funny)
So there really was keyboards without a backspace...And I always thought it was just a bad dream, like the one with the strange man, pickup van, and false promises of candy...
It's a good thing no one patented the backspace, though. Wait a minute, I think I just came up with a business plan!
TI99/4a (Score:3, Interesting)
C64 mostly OK. (Score:3, Informative)
I take issue with the complaint about the C64 keyboard. The only serious problem with the C64 keyboard was its integration with the computer so that every bang of a key sent a nice little shockwave into the electronics. The extra symbols were on the edge of the key and printed in a different color. It took about 5 minutes before the operator learned to ignore them. They were, however, extremely helpful to the software developers that wanted to use those symbols. I also don't recall having any trouble missing the backspace key and hitting clear/home. I can see how I might if I had previously been used to a long backspace key, but I wasn't previously used to one.
Funny this just came up (Score:4, Interesting)
But then I thought, "what if these things have the same lead problem as the Chinese toys?"
I'm quite certain that even the most well-designed lead-laden keyboard would be worse than the worst-design on this list.
Has anyone tested keyboards for lead yet?
Like the list... Hate the page! (Score:4, Insightful)
I'm a Mac fan but...... (Score:3, Insightful)
Re: (Score:3, Informative)
... and the ZX80? (Score:4, Interesting)
I remember when I sold my Sinclair ZX80 and bought the Sinclair ZX81 - and marvelled at the relative comfort of its keyboard. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sinclair_ZX80 [wikipedia.org] Compared to the ZX80, the Commodore keyboard was a joy.
In fact every machine Sinclair made had a slightly dodgy keyboard - the QL was a pain to word-process on and the Cambridge Z88 was - effective, and quiet, but took some getting used to.
The worst keyboards _I_ ever used... (Score:4, Interesting)
The problem was that every CTRL combination required you to stretch your pinky that much further from the rest of your fingers than usual.
And one of them was at a company that used emacs as their standard text editor.
That was the only time in my life that using a computer made my hands, or rather my left hand, hurt so badly that I was on the verge of seeing a doctor. I trained myself to type all CTRL combinations using two hands, and the problem gradually subsided.
disagree on some points (Score:5, Informative)
Mostly, I don't understand why the article complains so much about old keyboards, from times when everyone, including the computer companies, was still working things out. There are perfectly crappy keyboards on the market right now. Sure, they have a "standard" layout, but after using them for 3 weeks the keys start to rub off so you can start to learn touch-typing, except that the tactile feedback is nonexistent and the keypresses unreliable. I'd consider that much worse than having key X next to key Y.
Also, can we add the article to the list of "10 worst article navigation methods"?
Apple white G5 keyboard (Score:3, Insightful)
The white keyboard coming with the first generation G5 Power Mac was the worst I've ever used. It had hardly any space between the keys, and I constantly pressed more than one key. Apart from that, it was super elegant and didn't have any cover. So huge amounts of dust, dirt and food collected over they years. And as with many things coming from Apple, it was almost impossible to open up and clean.
While the C64 keyboard was somewhat unpleasant to use, it didn't have any of these problems.
Re: (Score:3, Informative)
Re: (Score:3, Informative)
I don't have multimedia keys, so I mapped Win+Left = previous track, Win+Right = next track, Win+Up = volume up, Win+Ins = Play/Pause, etc. I also have Win+F = Firefox, Win+T = Thunderbird, etc.
In this way, they do act as global modifiers rather than a separate key.
Re:"Windows Key" anyone? (Score:4, Interesting)
OTOH, I really like an unintended consequence of the Windows key. I've got a MS "Natural Multimedia" keyboard where the Windows key shoves the left Alt key over to where it's comfortably positioned directly under my left thumb. Since the vim editor ships without any Alt combos premapped, all of them are free for me to customize for may favorite commands and macros. I get easy access to a couple of dozen of my most frequently used commands while barely moving any fingers. (Most importantly, I mapped Alt+F to replace the infamous ESC mode switch.)
The truly stupid thing about this keyboard is Microsoft's brain-dead idea for the "F-Lock" key, which replaces all the function keys with bogus new fixed function keycodes like "Open" and "Send". The keyboard comes up by default with the function keys disabled, and there's no way to switch the mode via software; you have to physically press the F-lock button to switch modes. I had to find and install a special script to make Linux reinterpret the stupid new keycodes as regular function keys.
Parent
Re: (Score:3, Informative)
Re:The sad truth about cmdrtaco (Score:4, Funny)
Parent
Re: (Score:3, Informative)
And not even original [ebaumsworld.com]